The Annual General Meeting (AGM) of the Chestermere Regional Community Association (CRCA) on Jan. 22 offered an opportunity for members of the community to share their concerns, but CRCA refused to let officials from Rocky View County (RVC) address any issues.
“We were extremely disappointed in the lack of openness and the absence of integrity demonstrated by some of the participants and CRCA board members at this meeting,” said Grant Kaiser, manager of communications with RVC. “When people hear both sides of an issues, they can make intelligent decisions and choices.”
Kaiser said the County believes officials were denied the opportunity to present their “side of the story” as, according to Kaiser, it would have “resulted in a very different outcome at this meeting.”
However, according to CRCA Board President Brian Stamler, RVC was asked “respectfully” not to attend the AGM. Stamler said the board wanted the meeting to provide members with an update on the board’s activities, “not to enter into a debate with (RVC).”
“There was no need for (RVC) to be at the AGM as they had continuously expressed their thoughts through the media and also on the evening of the cancelled AGM in December 2014,” Stamler said. “When (RVC) representatives arrived at the meeting, in spite of our request they not attend, we had a discussion with them.”
RCMP officers requested that RVC officials remain silent throughout the meeting, and RVC complied. Kaiser said RVC has been permitted to speak in the past, but prefers to take a relatively “hands-off” approach.
While the Chestermere Regional Recreation Complex is owned and operated by the CRCA, the facility is located on land owned by RVC. Stamler said the land is leased by the CRCA until 2029, and according to Kaiser, RVC doesn’t charge any rent or fees for the use of the County’s land.
“In addition, the County has provided them with over $1.35 million in funding since 2008 alone, and much more since the original agreement over 30 years ago,” said Kaiser. “The money was to help the facility serve the residents of (RVC) who wanted to use the facility.”
Kaiser said RVC hopes to rebuild the “excellent relationship” RVC and CRCA shared for more than 30 years. However, in early 2014, Kaiser said RVC found the activities of some new board members “highly questionable.”
“These activities included board members participating in leasing deals with people and companies they were connected to, hiring consultants without a competitive selection process, and dealing with facility staff in a manner that may have resulted in lawsuits,” Kaiser said.
According to Kaiser, RVC expressed their concerns to the board, offering to work with them on developing policies and procedures to ensure there was no conflict of interest or perceived conflict of interest in their decision making going forward. He said the offer was met with “stonewalling,” and their repeated refusal to address the issue to the County’s satisfaction has led to the current situation.
Until the summer of 2014, RVC had been providing the CRCA with $200,000 a year. Those grants have been suspended until the conflict of interest situation is resolved. According to Kaiser, the County has no interest in taking over the facility or controlling who is elected to the CRCA board.
“The County is simply looking for the CRCA to adopt and follow conflict of interest bylaw to ensure that all board members are acting in the best interests of facility users and taxpayers, and not in a manner that benefits them personally,” Kaiser said. He added that while the CRCA did not have these bylaws in the past, RVC is concerned that they’re not adopting them “now and for the future.”
CRCA refused to adopt the bylaws proposed by RVC, and called for the bylaws to be reviewed and rewritten.
CRCA refused to comment further on the matter and referred to a prepared statement.
The association also decided to proceed to an election committee to select the next board, and a number of members volunteered to serve on the new committee.
“This will allow for the members to be better informed and provide better background information about who they want to lead the organization going forward,” said Stamler. “This facility is for us, our children and grandchildren.”
As for RVC, Kaiser said, “We never had any intention of making a speech or presentation (at the AGM), but we believe we should have been allowed to answer the public’s questions.”
“If the objective is to provide excellent recreational opportunities in a way that is respectful of taxpayer dollars in an honest and transparent manner, then RVC is the best friend the people of Chestermere could possibly have.”
Kaiser said the complex, which opened in 1982, is currently in operation and RVC will continue to do its best to “ensure that continues to be the case.” However, Stamler said he feels the board needs to look at possibly raising the funds to allow the CRCA to be self-sufficient if they can’t depend on continued funding from the municipalities.
“We need to find out from (RVC) and the City of Chestermere what they require to resume long term funding of capital and operation requirements of the facility,” he said.
“I think we can become self-sufficient, but the CRCA is an important recreational facility to both the City of Chestermere and (RVC) to meet the needs of their residents.”
